lefteris_kaliamboswikiaorg-20200214-history
HISTORY OF STRONG INTERACTION
Lefteris Kaliambos (Natural Philosopher) August 28, 2015 After the discovery of electron by J.J. Thomson (1896) and the nucleus by Rutherford (1911) Bohr in 1913 in his model of hydrogen atom based on the correct Planck particles of light or quanta of energy E = hν (1900) applied the electric force of the well-established law of Coulomb (1785) on the proton-electron interaction. Then after the discovery of the wave nature of electron the Bohr model led to the correct formulation of the Schrodinger equation (1926) in the so-called Quantum Mechanics (QM). Despite the enormous success of the Bohr model and the Schrodinger equation for explaining the details of the binding energy of the proton-electron interaction based on the well-established laws of electromagnetism, the discovery of the assumed uncharged neutron (1932) led to the abandonment of natural electromagnetic laws in favor of invalid nuclear theories, like the exchange interaction (Heisenberg 1932), the week interaction (Fermi 1934), the meson theory of strong interaction ( Yukawa 1935), the electroweak theory (Weinberg 1967), and the quantum chromodynamics (Gell-Mann 1973) according to which the fallacious massless gluons, analogous to Einstein’s the false massless quanta of fields, should be the carriers of the so-called strong interactions.Under this physics crisis I published my paper "Nuclear structure is governed by the fundamental laws of electromagnetism" (2003) presented also at a nuclear physics conference held at NCSR. "Demokritos" (2002). It should be noted that at the 2002 Nuclear Conference, the eminent physicist Dr Th. Kalogeropoulos, who came from Princeton University to present work at the conference (see photo with his walking stick next to me) as an Einstein student under the influence of the contradicting relativity theories initially criticized my discovery of nuclear force and structure. In fact, the experiments of the magnetic moments and the deep inelastic scattering revealed the charge distributions in the proton - neutron attractions or the p-n systems, able to overcome the repulsive energies of the p-p systems. So in the absence of such a detailed knowledge at the beginning of nuclear physics the difficulty faced by the nuclear physicists was not merely that nucleus is a many-body system, but worse yet, the fundamental laws governing nuclear interactions, (called strong interactions), were far more complex than those of electromagnetism. Probably the outstanding characteristics of the so-called strong force are its enormous strength of very short distances and very short range like the dipole-dipole interactions. For example in the simplest helium nucleus the binding energy of the proton-neutron systems should be stronger than the repulsive energy between two protons treated as point charges with a charge +e = 1.6/1019 Cb . Particularly at the distance 2R= 1.68/1015 m (where R = 0.84/1015 m is the radius of proton) the simple repulsive force of the Coulomb law gives a repulsive energy in terms of eV given by E = Ke/2R = 9(109)(1.6/1019) / (1.68/1015) = 857000 eV = 0.857 ΜeV while the ionization energy of the hydrogen is E = 13.6 eV In other words the repulsive energy of the two protons treated as point charges at the distance 2R is 63015 times stronger than the hydrogen ionization energy. Much was known about of details of this strong force from careful analysis of an enormous number of experiments. But such a strong force could not be couched in a simple formalism, nor could it be expressed in a closed analytic form like the electromagnetic force. Hence in the absence of a detailed knowledge about the charge distributions in nucleons for the description of nuclear properties one should rely on various models and no single model was completely adequate to reproduce all experimental data. Today it is well known that the binding energy of deuteron (p-n system) is E = 2.2246 MeV. According to the experiments of the magnetic moments the proton is treated not as a particle having a point charge +e, because it consists of a negative point charge (-q = -5e/3) existing at the center of proton and a positive charged ring existing along the periphery (+Q = +8e/3). Moreover the neutron is treated not as a neutral particle, because it consists of a positive point charge (+q = +8e/3) existing at the center of neutron and of a negative charged ring existing along the periphery (-Q = -8e/3). Under such charge distributions one concludes that the simple application of the Coulomb law for the interaction of the point charges in the centers of nucleons at the distance 2R provides a very strong binding energy (in MeV) given by E = Ke(5/3)(8/3) / 2R = (1.6/1019) /(1.68/1015) = 3.8 MeV While the combinations of the charge distributions like (-q,-Q), (+Q,+q) and (+Q,-Q) of the p-n interactions under differential equations of electromagnetism provide a net repulsive electromagnetic energy E = 1.5754 MeV. That is, the binding energy of deuteron (simplest p-n system) having parallel spin is the result of the very strong negative electric energy of the point charges at the centers of nucleons and the net positive electromagnetic energy of the combinations of charge distributions of the spinning p-n systems. Historically the nuclear force or strong interaction had been at the heart of nuclear physics after the discovery of the assumed uncharged neutron by Chadwick. The traditional goal of nuclear physics was to understand the properties of atomic nuclei in terms of the 'bare' interaction between pairs of nucleons, or nucleon–nucleon forces (NN forces). Unfortunately after the abandonment of natural laws physicists believed incorrectly that at very short distance the p-n systems and also the p-p and n-n systems provide attractive forces under a fallacious hypothesis of charge independence, because it was not known that nucleons consist of charge distributions able to give the binding energies under the applications of natural laws. So in vain physicists tried to discover new natural laws for solving the nuclear binding. Just after the discovery of the neutron, Heisenberg and Dmitri Ivanenko had proposed proton–neutron models for the nucleus. Heisenberg tried to approach the description of protons and neutrons in the nucleus through quantum mechanics, an approach that was not at all obvious at the time. Heisenberg's theory for protons and neutrons in the nucleus was the first wrong hypothesis toward understanding the nucleus as a quantum mechanical system by introducing the first wrong theory of nuclear exchange forces. He considered protons and neutrons to be different quantum states of the same particle, by introducing the wrong concept of isospin. One of the earliest fallacious models for the nuclear structure was the liquid drop model developed in the 1930s. One property of nuclei is that the average binding energy per nucleon is approximately the same for all stable nuclei, which is similar to a liquid drop. The liquid drop model treated the nucleus as a drop of incompressible nuclear fluid, with nucleons behaving like molecules in a liquid. The model was first proposed by George Gamow and then developed by Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg and Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker. This crude model did not explain all the properties of the nucleus and in the absence of a detailed knowledge about the new structure of protons and neutrons the model tried to give predictions for the nuclear binding energy of nuclei but without any success. On the oter hand, though the so-called Pauli prinsiple ( opposite spin of two electrons) cannot be applied in the symplest p-n structure, the deuteron of parallel spin, physicists developed the wrong nuclear shell models by using incorrectly the Pauli principle of atoms. Nevertheless today many physicists believe that the shell models explain very well the nuclear structure. In the "Nuclar shell model -WIKIPEDIA" one reads: "In nuclear physics and nuclear chemistry, the nuclear shell model '''is a model of the atomic nucleus which uses the Pauli exclusion principle to describe the structure of the nucleus in terms of energy levels. The first shell model was proposed by Dmitry Ivanenko (together with E. Gapon) in 1932. The model was developed in 1949 following independent work by several physicists, most notably Eugene Paul Wigner, Maria Goeppert-Mayer and J. Hans D. Jensen, who shared the 1963 Nobel Prize in Physics for their contributions." After the abandonment of the same natural laws of force acting at a distance, in 1935, Yukawa following the wrong ideas of force carriers based on Einstein’s massless quanta of fields, made the earliest hypothesis to explain the short-ranged force of the nuclear binding. According to his wrong theory, massive bosons (mesons) mediate the interaction between two nucleons. Although, in light of quantum chromodynamics (QCD), meson theory is no longer perceived as fundamental, the meson-exchange concept (where hadrons are treated as elementary particles) continues to represent the working model for the fallacious NN potential. Throughout the 1930s a group at Columbia University lead by I. I. Rabi developed magnetic resonance techniques to determine the magnetic moments of nuclei. These measurements led to the discovery in 1939 that the deuteron also possessed an electric quadrupole moment.This electrical property of the deuteron had been interfering with the measurements by the Rabi group. The deuteron, composed of a proton and a neutron, is one of the simplest nuclear systems. The discovery meant that the physical shape of the deuteron was not symmetric, which provided valuable insight into the nature of the nuclear force binding nucleons. In particular, the result showed that the nuclear force was not a central force, but had a tensor character. Hans Bethe identified the discovery of the deuteron's quadrupole moment as one of the important events during the formative years of nuclear physics. Historically, the task of describing the nuclear force phenomenologically was formidable. The first semi-empirical models came in the mid-1950s, such as the Woods–Saxon potential (1954). Then experiments showed that nucleons consist of quarks. Although Gell-Mann in 1964 discovered that the quarks have fundamental charges of the well-established laws of electromagnetism, later (1973) influenced by Einstein’s false massless quanta of fields he introduced the false hypothesis that the quarks interact under strange color charges giving hypothetical color forces. Gell-Mann hypothesized that the property of the quarks is that they carry a hypothetical color charge, and hence, interact via a hypothetical strong interaction. Under such fallacious ideas the wrong Standard Model classified four assumed fundamental forces in nature. In the Standard Model, a force is described as an exchange of bosons between the objects affected, such as a wrong virtual photon for the electromagnetic force and a fallacious gluon for the strong interaction. In fact. in nature there exist only the well known forces of gravity and electromagnetism. Particularly in atomic and in nuclear physics we observe also weak electromagnetic interactions due to the absorption of dipole photons and the neutrino-quark interaction. Whereas, the strong electromagnetic interactions are due to the nucleon-nucleon interaction and the quark-quark interaction under the application of the charge-charge interactions of the well-established laws of electromagnetism. Under this crisis of physics I published my paper of 2003.. In that paper I showed that the nuclear force and structure are due to the applications of natural laws because the experiments of the magnetic moments of nucleons and the deep inelastic scattering showed that protons and neutrons consist of 9 and 12 extra charged quarks respectively existing among 288 quarks in nucleons able to give the binding energy E = 2.2246 MeV of deuteron. Under these discoveries, in fact, in nature there exist only the unified forces of gravity and of electromagnetism acting at a distance. (DISCOVERY OF UNIFIED FORCES). Note that the experiments of the Quantum Entanglement confirmed the fundamental action at a distance of the well-established laws of force. Whereas, Einstein in order to support his false massless quanta of fields, (which led to his invalid relativity), called it “Spooky action at a distance”. In fact, after my discovery of the Photon-Matter Interaction, in nature there exist dipole photons which invalidate Einstein’s contradicting relativity theories, which violate the two conservation laws of energy and mass. Unfortunately, Einstein under his false massless quanta of fields believed incorrectly that the mass defect ΔΜ = 2.2246 MeV/c2 during the formation of deuteron is responsible for the nuclear binding because he assumed that it turns into the photon energy hν = 2.2246 MeV. Of course such a fallacious idea violates the two conservation laws of energy and mass and did much to retard the progress of nuclear physics. In fact, I discovered that the binding energy ΔΕ = 2.2246 MeV of the deuteron is due to the electromagnetic forces of natural laws between the charge distributions of proton and neutron. As in the case of the correct Bohr model in deuteron the electromagnetic energy ΔΕ = 2.2246 MeV turns into the photon energy hν = 2.2246 MeV, while the mass defect ΔΜ = 2.2246 MeV/c2 turns into the photon mass m = hν/c2 in accordance with the two conservation laws of energy and mass.That is my discovery of the LAW OF ENERGY AND MASS rejects the invalid rest energy of Einstein. It is well known that before my paper of 2003 the nuclear force or strong interaction was shrouded in mystery, because the nuclear force could not be couched in a simple formalism. Under this condition the discovery of the quarks, replaced the meson theory by introducing the wrong hypothesis of strange color forces exerting between hypothetical gluons of the quantum chromodynamics. Note that the theory was introduced in 1973 by the discoverer of quarks Gell-Mann. However the mass of the proposed three quarks in nucleons have mass 96 times less than the masses of nucleons. Under this experimental condition Gell-Mann influenced by Einstein’s wrong massless quanta of fields (behaving as quanta of Maxwell’s fallacious fields) believed that the rest of the nucleon mass is composed of hypothetical massless gluons. Under such fallaciousideas today many physicists belive that the nuclear force is a residual force of the hypothetical color forces. For example in "Nuclear force-WIKIPEDIA" one reads: "The nuclear force is a residual effect of the more fundamental strong force, or strong interaction. The strong interaction is the attractive force that binds the elementary particles called quarks together to form the nucleons themselves. This more powerful force is mediated by particles called gluons. Gluons hold quarks together with a force like that of electric charge, but of far greater strength. Quarks, gluons and their dynamics are mostly confined within nucleons, but residual influences extend slightly beyond nucleon boundaries to give rise to the nuclear force". On the other hand Fermi in 1934 in order to explain the decay of free neutron into a proton, electron, and antineutrino, developed the wrong theory of weak interaction according to which in nature there exist strange forces of zero range. So in a confusion of fallacious strong and weak interactions in1968 Glashow, Salam, and Weinberg tried to unify the fallacious weak interaction with the real forces of electromagnetism of the well-established laws by suggesting a new wrong theory called electroweak theory. Especially in 1967 Weinberg and Salam tried to incorporate the invalid Higgs boson into Glashow’s electroweak theory. (See my CONFUSING CERN RESULTS AND IDEAS ). In fact, energy does not turn to mass. Nevertheless Higgs influenced by Einstein’s incorrect relativity believed that his mechanism is able to give rises to the masses of all elementary particles of the wrong Standard Model. Among invalid particles like massless and virtual photons this includes the hypothetical particles like gluons and gravitons. Later physicists under the same nuclear crisis tried to unify the fallacious strong and weak interactions with the real electromagnetic forces by introducing new hypotheses called Grand Unified Theories (GUTs), because it was believed that the invalid massless and virtual photons as mediators of electromagnetism and the hypothetical massless gluons as mediators of the fallacious strong interaction appear as components of a single multicomponent field. Under this confusion I found that the experiments of atomic and nuclear physics reject Einstein’s fields and the Standard model. (EXPERIMENTS REJECT RELATIVITY). Also the discovery of the electron spin (1925) rejected Einstein’s ideas because the peripheral velocity of the electron spin is faster than the speed of light.(FASTER THAN LIGHT). It is fortunate that the experiments of the mass defect in atomic and nuclear bindings along with the experiments of the magnetic moments of nucleons led me to discover the correct nuclear binding due to the strong electromagnetic forces of short range between 9 extra charged quarks in proton and 12 ones in neutron existing among 288 quarks in nucleons Nevertheless today many physicists cannot follow the enormous success of the applications of natural laws on nuclear phenomena and under the influence of Einstein’s invalid relativity believe incorrectly that the wrong standard model could be a self-consistent model which should demonstrate the atomic and nuclear phenomena. For example in the dominant article "Standard Model-WIKIPEDIA" one reads: "The '''Standard Model of particle physics is a theory concerning the electromagnetic, weak, and strong nuclear interactions, as well as classifying all the subatomic particles known. It was developed throughout the latter half of the 20th century, as a collaborative effort of scientists around the world. The current formulation was finalized in the mid-1970s upon experimental confirmation of the existence ofquarks. Since then, discoveries of the top quark (1995), the tau neutrino(2000), and more recently the Higgs boson (2013), have given further credence to the Standard Model. Because of its success in explaining a wide variety of experimental results, the Standard Model is sometimes regarded as a theory of almost everything". Category:Fundamental physics concepts